| Title |
MyoD promotes porcine PPARγ gene expression through an E-box and a MyoD-binding site in the PPARγ promoter region
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cell and Tissue Research, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00441-016-2380-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bing Deng, Feng Zhang, Kun Chen, Jianghui Wen, Haijun Huang, Wu Liu, Shengqiang Ye, Lixia Wang, Yu Yang, Ping Gong, Siwen Jiang |
| Abstract |
Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ (PPARγ) is a key transcription factor in adipogenesis and can be regulated by adipogenesis-related factors. However, little information is available regarding its regulation by myogenic factors. In this study, we found that over-expression of MyoD enhanced porcine adipocyte differentiation and up-regulated PPARγ expression, whereas small interfering RNA against MyoD significantly attenuated porcine adipocyte differentiation and inhibited PPARγ expression. The MyoD-binding sites in the PPARγ promoter region at -412 to -396 and -155 to -150 were identified by promoter deletion analysis and site-directed mutagenesis. Electrophoretic mobility shift assays and chromatin immunoprecipitation further showed that these two regions are MyoD-binding sites, both in vitro and in vivo, indicating that MyoD directly interacts with the porcine PPARγ promoter. Thus, our results demonstrate that an Enhancer box and a binding site for a cooperative co-activator of MyoD are present in the promoter region of porcine PPARγ; furthermore, MyoD up-regulates PPARγ expression and promotes porcine adipocyte differentiation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| France | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 14 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 3 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 36% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 14% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 6 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 May 2017.
All research outputs
#18,563,902
of 23,839,820 outputs
Outputs from Cell and Tissue Research
#1,645
of 2,279 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,336
of 301,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cell and Tissue Research
#12
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,839,820 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,279 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 301,116 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.